Godzilla 2014.

We saw the movie last night and I thought it was OK.

My two criticisms would be :

A. I didn't see the IMAX version but saw it in 3D. I thought the 3D was basically a waste of money because it didn't look all that "3D" to my eyes.
B. There were quite a few scenes of the city in ruins with skyscrapers half destroyed shells of their former selves, but there weren't enough scenes conveying the panic and fear of the people in those buildings or the
mass hysteria of the people on the streets reacting in horror to what was going on. That would have brought the gravity of the situation a little closer to home IMO. Instead, city blocks would be wrecked from a distance and then we would get a cutaway to the general or whatever he was patiently explaining that it was his job to save as many people as he can. There were a couple of shots of people running in the streets and people reacting as their building was destroyed but I didn't get that I'm also a "man on the street" deaking with the crisis feeling, if that makes sense.

 

Glenn, let me ask you this. The one thing I like about modern day 3D is that it really opens up depth of field, rather than using cheap "in your face" gimmicks.

Do you also appreciate that, or do you like the old school style?

Did the 3D in this one not convey that depth?

 

There were some 'panic in the streets' shots when the Mofo and Big G had a warm-up rumble in Honolulu but I think that SFO was evacuated before the championship bout, which may be the narrative trick used to deny the mass terror that you mention.

--Geoff

 

Good question .I also prefer depth of field 3D generally. For example, I saw The Wizard of Oz in 3D IMAX and I loved how it sort of subtlety opened up the viewing experience without resorting to throwing knives in my face or whatever. In this particular case though I didn't get enough sense of depth to justify the extra money. A few times I'd look at the screen over the 3D glasses and I wasn't wowed by the difference. It was kind of mediocre 3D IMO.

 

Saw this today, going in knowing its been getting mixed reviews. Vaguely disappointing in that:

while the plot was fairly simple, it just took too long to shift into 2nd and 3rd gear.

David Staitharn is a solid actor but his lines were ludicrous, distractingly so. He seemed all too aware of that.

while Godzilla seemed to lumber about on land, he was apparently quite speedy in the sea?

As Vidiot mentioned, the notion that Godzilla was a good guy, or at least benevolent, is questionable at best. I doubt Godzilla felt 'welcomed' by the human firepower directed at him.

Aside from that, the movie has a grim majesty and some intensely spectacular scenes. Good, but coulda been better.

 

Oh yeah , there were some scenes like that, I just needed more regular Joe panic in the streets to make it a little more human to me, or at least as human as.a movie is going to be about giant monsters ruining the world .

 

What a crappy movie, i must admit the trailer bought me it was pretty good of course before seeing the movie...........

But i agree the atomic breath scene was pretty fun lol but only that, beggining was ok but when the insect appeared..........ahhhhhhhhhhhh boooooooring though this was gonna be a more oriented adult version........was wrong.

Only Godzuki was missing from this version!!

 

I saw it tonight. I still like the guy in the rubber suit better, and Gareth Davies' previous film, Monsters, which was shot for almost nothing, is far more interesting.

 

I thought it was a very well balance monster flick. Not too much screaming and kicking, not to many fruitless efforts to kill the monsters with M16s (just enough to show what people do under stressful situations) and Godzilla wasn't really portrayed as a "good" guy until after he slew the real menaces. Godzilla was indifferent to us; he came, conquered, rested and swam away.

I think that we have become so used to the inane, mindless and grossly overdone "action" movies that this Godzilla movie feels underdone to many people. One of the characters in the movie stated that Godzilla restored balance in nature (or something like that), perhaps the monster movie "Godzilla" will restore some balance in the absolutely skewed world of monster/action movies.

 

I got to see Godzilla last night at 7:15.

I give the film a B+. I hope it ends up being like Batman Begins which was fantastic, but then they absolutely nailed it on the Dark Knight. I agree with above, that it will be interesting to see how they will do the sequel. You would think the first film would be an origin story, and the only creature would be Godzilla. Instead, this was like a sequel to Gojira (1954). So how will they continue on? I am hoping for other Toho monsters in the 2nd one. And I am hoping for a Kiaju royal rumble for the 3rd one, with monsters tearing cities up across the globe, until they all fight each other.

Godzilla movies are a lot like martial arts films. The plot is just a device to get you to the fight scenes, and the fight scenes better deliver. The plot was fine in this film. It was not mind blowing, where it would stand on its own, but it did not have to. Because, the battles were a homerun.

***Spoiler Alert***







Unless you just hate Godzilla, everyone reading this had to get a rush when Godzilla's spines lit up for the first time, followed by the absolute best nuclear breath effect I have ever seen. Sometimes it just looked like fog on the old movies. We also got a Godzilla tail whip for one kill, and I never would have guessed that. And the way he kills the other M.U.T.O. was just great. My wife even glowed about the film, and that was a miracle.

 

I have to admit, that was a good moment. I just wish everything around it wasn't so stupid.

Note that the movie dropped 67% this weekend, which is not good:

Godzilla, the WBros./Legendary Pic fell off big in its second weekend — 67% — for a 3-day total of $30.9M to $31.1M and a four-day of $38.7M to $39.4M. It fell 12% from Saturday to Sunday so percentage declines today will determine the outcome. Worldwide, it’s now at $167.7M, having done a bit better than estimated yesterday from 64 markets overseas.

http://www.deadline.com/2014/05/box...-day-opener-blended-in-top-three-for-weekend/

 

SPOILERS (naturally)



Just saw it. Not horrible, not great. I was loving the first 20 minutes because it was very well directed. My expectations soared for awhile. You could tell director Gareth Edwards watched about a dozen Spielberg movies before taking this on. (What else should you watch beside Spielberg when you're being handed your first Mega Action Movie?) So I was delighted to see the refined use of the camera and editing in the opening minutes. Elegant and clever direction ... but sadly it got swallowed up by the production as it went along. The promise of it being a HUMAN movie got lost along the way.

I can hardly blame the guy. The pressure to produce something like this must be tremendous. Can you imagine suddenly being put in control of a massive crew, hundreds of extras and millions of dollars in sets and effects? I can't. I think he held the film together for the most part, but I think Godzilla was haphazardly structured. Whether that was Edwards' fault or if he was following the script closely, it was just badly structured and fragmented.

I will blame Edwards for jumping around so much and never giving the film a focus. Obtensibly Bryan Cranston's son was our hero (BIG SPOILER: I had no freaking idea Cranston was going to check out a half hour into the film. False advertising! What a critical mistake!), but his role was completely underwritten. I can't even blame the actor as others have been doing. It wasn't his fault. He just didn't have a part! The way the magic of the movies works is that we develop an empathy with our hero and we follow him on his journey -- his journey becoming ours. In Godzilla, the soldier was more a passive figure than an active one. I never got the sense I was following him in this fight or that he was leading it. I never felt moved or affectionate for his character. There was just nothing written for him. No HUMOR (and I mean NADA. Edwards, ever heard the expression "the days of thrills and laughter?" It's how they used to refer to the golden age of Hollywood. Remember that word "laughter." Audiences need it. Even your darkest piece of stage drama, from McBeth onward, has a few chuckles in it ... for good reason), no humanity. No human dialogue. Never asked a question, never a moment of doubt. Nothing to make me say "I can relate to this guy!" Just a cog in the action mechanism.

And that was the other big problem with this film: Hollywood overkill. I know modern audiences cant live without a constant palate of explosions, but if you don't have the quiet moments, the big moments mean nothing. Godzilla had plenty of action, but it was exhausting and therefore became mundane and destroyed any chance of a rousing climax. How can you build to an explosive climax when you treat the entire film like a 2-hour orgasm?

And Edwards of all people should have known that. His Monsters movie was the slap and tickle for 2 hours until we were just dying to see the monsters or something resembling action. Here, I would have killed for a little breather. Did ANY two people in this movie even pause for a second to hold a conversation about the bizarreness or the enormity of what was going on? Not that I remember.

And I will blame Edwards for not being able to direct a good, sustained action sequence. He's a good director, but maybe not yet a fully fledged action director. That's what he should have taken away from his Spielberg lesson. Think of the Raiders of the Lost Ark truck chase, there's nothing more alive cinematically than a well-directed and choreographed SEQUENCE. You hear me Edwards? A couple cool shots do not a SEQUENCE make. For christ's sake, we finally get Godzilla together with the Muto for the promised fight, but he just couldn't let us watch them fight. No, he had to keep cutting around and ruin the chance for some real satisfying action. If he had wanted to do the ULTIMATE Godzilla movie 2014 it should have ended with a brilliant 8-minute showdown with a city being stomped in all Hollywood's state of the art digital glory!

I hate to say it, but they should have given Michael Bay this film. His attack of the "drill creature" on the skyscraper in Dark of the Moon was a stunning sequence. This film never wove together a decent sustained set piece. Oh, there were lots of set pieces, but they just weren't well done, being watered down by Edwards jumpy structure.

Wow, I sure have written a lot about this. I guess I just like to analyze while it's fresh on the mind. So why was Godzilla ulitmately boring? Overkill and under written parts. Where's the Man in the Hat when you need him? Thank God Lawrence Kasdan is coming back for the new Stars Wars! Maybe we'll finally get a script!

 

My 8 year old godson thought this was one of the greatest movies ever!
If many old farts don't like it .....really most of you guys don't go to the movie theater anyway.
It's the youth of the world that generates most of the income for hollywood those are the people that count in the end.
He never stopped talking about this film the whole holiday weekend.
Godzilla Godzilla Godzilla !!

 

Plenty of good points. I agree that the critical mistake was replacing Cranston with a character I didn't care about. Cranston may have been chewing the scenery during his brief screen time, but that's what the rest of the film needed.

I may have to give in and watch the Transformers films so I know how this compares to those.

 

If you must, be sure to bring motion sickness pills, and wear a neck brace...

 

I recommend the first Transformer and the 3rd for effects. The second has a little goof ball comedy.

 

I actually am hoping for a Godzilla sequel that will "correct" some of the shortcomings in the current film. I liked the movie (would rate it a B+); the biggest complaint I have was that I wanted more screen time for Godzilla.

 

Just got back. I'd tell someone if they asked, wait and rent or ppv or HBO. Way, way to long for Godzilla and way, way to much story crap. The movie title is Godzilla so the fricken thing. By the time it had any kind of air time I was bored. Bummer.

 

Oddly enough, that review actually gives me hope...

 

Hope for what?

 

Shokhead dislikes = probably a good movie
Shokhead likes = probably best to skip it

Well you asked!

 

That it may actually be a good movie...

 

If you're hoping for a decent story, keep on movin'.

 

Then pay the bucks and go see it, don't wait.

 

Having seen "Transcendence" and "Godzilla" back to back over the weekend, I felt like I needed to cleanse my movie palate. So what do I do? I wind up watching "Pain and Gain" on Netflix last night! Another lemon! Michael Bay attempting so do Scorsese. Yeah, right, like that's gonna happen! Halfway through the movie I turned it off. I think I better watch a classic and quick.